<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<div>
<div>On May 31, 2013, at 1:47 AM, Jason Schiller <<a href="mailto:jschiller@google.com">jschiller@google.com</a>></div>
<div> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>John,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div style="">Reading your respons brings to mind a general question.</div>
<div style=""><br>
</div>
<div style="">You said "<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">the most likely </span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">change that would be anticipated </span></div>
<div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">by insertation of that into ARIN </span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">policy would be ..."</span></div>
<div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
</span></div>
<div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">In this and other cases the "that" is RFC-2050 text.</span></div>
<div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
</span></div>
<div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">Shouldn't the text of RFC-2050 already impact ARIN policy?</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>At the time of publication more than 15 years ago, RFC 2050 was a baseline </div>
<div>of operational guidelines for all of the regional registries, with each RIR free </div>
<div>to establish any additional guidelines as appropriate. Since that time, both</div>
<div>individual RIRs have evolved, as well as the entire structure of the Internet</div>
<div>Number Registry System. This is one of the key reasons why it was felt</div>
<div>that RFC2050 was long overdue to be refreshed, as many material issues</div>
<div>have changed since that time (e.g. Jon Postel no longer available as IANA,</div>
<div>formation of ICANN, introduction of additional RIRs, IPv6, etc.) RFC 2050</div>
<div>was operational guidelines from a single point in time, with it made clear</div>
<div>that the policies followed by an RIR could be supplemented with additional</div>
<div>policy and/or these global operational guidelines themselves could be </div>
<div>amended by the IANA to reflect changing requirements.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The reality is that the entire system has so extensively changed that each</div>
<div>RIR has its own adopted policy, has contractual relations with its members,</div>
<div>and we have a formal process with ICANN for adoption of global policy. There </div>
<div>is quite a bit in RFC 2050 operational guidelines which has been preempted </div>
<div>by these events, and hence the reason why the RFC2050bis effort has </div>
<div>focused on primarily describing the Internet Number Registry System, and </div>
<div>calling out those technical considerations from RFC 2050 which are inherent</div>
<div>to use of the the Internet Protocol and should be considered in establishing</div>
<div>registry policy.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I would say that the underlying concepts in RFC 2050 should indeed be</div>
<div>considered when setting ARIN registry policy, but how exactly that is done,</div>
<div>and how much weight is given to individual principles is very much up to this </div>
<div>community.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style=""><span style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.333333969116211px; ">(Assuming no translational issues, out of context, etc) </span></div>
<div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">why </span><span style="font-size:13.333333969116211px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">would the impact differ </span><span style="font-size:13.333333969116211px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">when
the text is in RFC-2050, </span></div>
<div style=""><span style="font-size:13.333333969116211px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">or in </span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px">the NRPM?</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">See above. ARIN must follow NRPM in operation of the registry, whereas</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">RFC 2050 is a 15 year-old base set of operational guidelines and technical</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">principles for consideration in establishing registry policy for this region.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"></div>
<div class="gmail_extra" style="">(I'm not debating there is value in community being more clear</div>
<div class="gmail_extra" style="">in outlining its expectations and impact on operations. I think </div>
<div class="gmail_extra" style="">that point is true if this text is added to the NRPM and while this </div>
<div class="gmail_extra" style="">text remains in RFC-2050.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As there is language in RFC 2050 which is clearly obsoleted by events,</div>
<div>it is necessary for the community to discuss and determine what aspects</div>
<div>should be considered current and incorporated into ARIN registry policy.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra" style="">We certainly can improve on the 2050 text, but I was trying to avoid</div>
<div class="gmail_extra" style="">any updates that may be controversial, and was more interesting in</div>
<div class="gmail_extra" style="">preserving the principles in 2050 in the first go around. )</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">A very admirable goal, but you are conflicted between the implied goals</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">of "avoiding updates" versus "producing something which is both current</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">and accurate." I'm not sure that the latter is achievable without quite a</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">bit of debate on what should be adopted.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Best wishes on your effort!</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">/John</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">John Curran</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">President and CEO</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">ARIN</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>